cm_send_smart_email

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the description's contribution is marginal. The warning emoji adds a subtle cue but does not elaborate on behavioral traits like irreversibility, cost, or rate limits.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, focused sentence with a warning prefix. It is concise, front-loaded, and contains no superfluous information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Despite the tool's complexity—8 parameters, nested objects, and required fields—the description lacks important context about what constitutes a 'smart transactional email', how to obtain the smartEmailID, or expected outcomes. The absence of output schema further limits completeness.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 100% schema description coverage, the input schema fully documents all parameters. The description adds no further semantic context beyond what the schema provides, earning the baseline score.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Send'), the resource ('smart transactional email'), and scope ('to one or more recipients'). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like cm_send_campaign and cm_send_classic_email.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as cm_send_campaign or cm_send_campaign_preview. There is no mention of prerequisites or context that would help the agent decide.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.